Cerebralbore101 said:
Chrkeller said:
And that was $70 that could have gone to performance. My point stands, the Gampad was expensive and brought nothing to the table. It was a poor decison. I bought a Pro controller and rarely tocuhed the Gamepad, so I paid $70 for what exactly? And $70 is being super generous considering Nintendo charged $112 for a replacement.
It is especially worth noting the Wii U launched in 2012. Your article is dated 2015.... 3 years after launch Nintendo charged $112.... meaning it was more expensive 3 years prior, given we both know tech drops in price over time.
|
I wasn't disagreeing with your point. I was backing it up and clarifying.
|
Fair enough and I also agree with your other point, that performance is more than just graphics. For me it is about consumer belief in 'bang for buck.' A $300 ps2 that also plays DVDs. Or a $300 Switch that is both a home and portable console. The Wii U never had that bang for the buck perception, and I personally agree with that perception. It was overpriced for what it brought to the table.